Site Mobile Navigation

What an Israeli-Palestinian Peace Framework Might Look Like

The Obama administration will soon publish a set of principles that is intended to serve as the basis for negotiations on an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.

Secretary of State John Kerry, who leads the effort, has been tight-lipped about the details. So have Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas. But what might the plan look like?

Daniel Kurtzer, a retired career diplomat, former ambassador to Israel and Egypt, former negotiator, author of several books on the peace process and now a professor at Princeton University, has put together a 6-page model framework.
Building on past concepts, including a peace plan proposed by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel in 2008, it envisions the establishment of a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, territory occupied by Israel during the 1967 war. There would be mutually agreed upon land swaps that would allow Israel to retain some settlements, while compensating Palestinians with land that is “reciprocal in terms of both quantity and quality.” Under Mr. Olmert’s proposal, Israel would have ended up with a net gain of about 4 percent of the occupied territory. Under Mr. Kurtzer’s draft, Israel would give up as much land as it retains, so there would be a 100 percent swap.

Mr. Kurtzer also proposes a way to settle the dispute over Mr. Netanyahu’s demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel not just as a state but as a Jewish state. Mr. Kurtzer’s wording: “Israel will recognize Palestine as the home of the Palestinian people and all its citizens and Palestine will recognize Israel as the national home of the Jewish people and all its citizens.”

He says Palestinian refugees should have the right of return to the state of Palestine while Israel should “offer a program of family reunification, including citizenship, for a limited number of refugees.” An international fund will be established to defray the cost of compensation and resettlement for Palestinian refugees and Jewish refugees from Arab countries.

As for Jerusalem, Mr. Kurtzer proposes that it become “the capital of the two states” and be “undivided and free of permanent barriers and other physical obstructions that impede daily life.” Outside the walls of the Old City, Jewish neighborhoods will be part of the state of Israel; Palestinian neighborhoods will be part of Palestine. Mr. Olmert had called for the holy sites to be administered jointly with the assistance of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United States; Mr. Kurtzer envisions an international administrator appointed by the two parties.

Addressing security, which is crucial for Israel, Mr. Kurtzer said the two states must refrain from threats or the use of force and forgo alliances that could bring them into conflict. Palestine’s security forces would be used and equipped only to maintain internal security and the rule of law. No armed forces will be allowed and international observers and early warning systems will be deployed to oversee implementation. The two states will cooperate in combating terrorism and other violence.

Mr. Kerry told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee last week that after decades of mostly failed peace efforts, the end game is well known. That is, “security arrangements that leave Israelis more secure, not less; mutual recognition of the nation-state of the Jewish people and the nation-state of the Palestinian people; an end to the conflict and to all claims; a just and agreed solution for Palestinian refugees, one that does not diminish the Jewish character of the state of Israel; and a resolution that finally allows Jerusalem to live up to its name as the City of Peace.”

If it were as cut and dried as that, Israel and the Palestinians would have made peace ages ago. Still, Mr. Kerry was making a good point. After all this time, the core issues have been well staked out. But Israeli and Palestinian leaders have usually not encouraged an open dialogue on the specifics. Rather, they have spent their time talking to their own communities, reinforcing maximalist demands and the perfidies of the other, not advocating areas of compromise.

If there’s any chance of Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas agreeing to a framework for negotiations, that will have to change.

Updated, 11:31 a.m. |
This post has been changed to make clear that, under Mr. Kurtzer’s plan, Israel would give up exactly as much land as it retains.